Author
Topic: The Bailiff of Jersey, (Read 42929 times)

According to Deputy Tadier even ministers support his view that the unelected Bailiff acting as speaker of the assembly should be replaced and an elected individual take his place. Off course if this were to be the case should he still receive around Â£305,000 pounds a year or should that be halved ?

Shoud the unelected Dean who is Governments number one lobbyist also be removed while they are at saving the taxpayer Â£26,000 a year plus invites to many grand and VIP cocktail parties. To be fair he does not have a vote but does have a say.

How can Jersey call itself a modern democracy when the head of the judiciary ( carrying out laws passed in the assembly ) also sit as speaker in the assembly deciding on which questions may be asked by a politician, who may or may not speak and for how long. The latest twist is that you must not use the name "Jesus Christ" in your narrative or be sent out of the assembly like a school boy or girl although you are democratically elected.

The bailiff,should not be ruler of the house . And if the taxpayer. Saved aÂ£150,000 maybe. The public could have another orthopaedic surgeon.The Dean should not be there either, unless we see other religions represented in a fair and even manner.Democracy,in jersey the jersey way.

Just now in the states bailache is still asking for a public gallery. What the bloody planet is this fool on does he still not get it thsat the island has no money for such things. He just not gives a s**t about the people of this island only the rich and the circle that he lives within.

Philip Bailhache has got too much power and I believe its gone to his head. What gives him the god given right to quieten Montford Tadier who is a representative of the voting public, not to bring up a very valid point about Jesus representing the common man, which is a darn site more that PB has ever done.

What really saddens and annoys me is how much of the child abuse has cost the taxpayer and a huge amount of it has gone to PB and his cronies - and he was also responsible for giving bad advice to an abused victim, i.e. don't bother pressing charges, the consequence of that was tragic.

About time a vote of no confidence was brought again him - yeah, I know it will never happen, his too powerful, but in a real democratic government it would.

Thanks to citizens media, and people like Proff Tony who writes researched articles, we find that the role of Bailiff or in the States Assembly it is " he that should be obeyed " becomes a subject for open discussion and the spreading on knowledge even in what some comentators refer to as a closed feudal system.

For foreign readers this is based on the Bailiff being unelected and given the job by letters patent from the Queen as are several other high offices, thus Jersey is a Crown Dependency.

For instance I have learnt today, that there is no appeal to the speakers ( bailiffs ) decision.

Part of an interesting article, Quote:

"At present the Bailiff is responsible for approving requests from Members when lodging questions, both oral and written, propositions, amendments and making personal statements. If the Bailiff rejects the requests there is no ability to appeal against that decision. I have personal experience and the current arrangements should not continue."

Thanks and all credit to tonymusings. The rest can be read by clicking on link.

Having a read through Hansard regarding the debate on removing the Bailiff as speaker of the assembly three short speeches caught my eye.

I thought they may be of interest, as they are just so full of common sense.

Deputy Higgins

Every time this Assembly has addressed this issue, there is always someone trying to sabotage the proposition: whether it be an amendment or a refer-back, or this, that and the other.

I am amazed that the people who are the ones doing it today are some of those who, for the last few years, have been saying: â€œOh, we believe that there should be a separation of the powers. We believe that the Bailiff should not be in the Assembly.â€ They always seem to be the same ones that keep on putting it off. We have got the Constable of St. Helier; probably when he was a Deputy he was arguing the case for the separation of power, but it never comes to pass.

We have got Senator Ozouf, another one who, again, is supposed to have had the view that there should be the separation of powers, but always there is something that is wrong with this. The Assembly has got until May 2018 if this Assembly is going to decide this issue. To be perfectly honest, I think if we delay the debate today and give a steer, perhaps, to P.P.C., it will never be done in this Assembly by the Members that are here. I believe that we should go ahead. All I can say is I am just appalled. It is just another wrecking attempt, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Deputy Martin

I love my Constable of St. Helier, but he has the gall to stand here today and tell me he does not know what his public wants. Since this has been lodged, we have had 6 Parish Assemblies. Did the Constable think to put it on?

Did the Constable of any Parish think in their Assemblies:

â€œOh, this is coming up. It is a massive constitutional change that the Deputy of St. Brelade is proposing.â€ Not one. This is why I am told we keep the Constables: â€œBecause they have their ears very close to the ground.

They meet their parishioners at their Parish Assemblies. They come to the Rates Assemblies, they come and tell them when they are not happy about something.â€ So if, from 24th May, you - sorry, they are all sitting to the right of me - had wanted any indication, why did you not put it to your Parish Assemblies? But to come here today and say: â€œOh, I have got no idea. People are not really phoning up.â€ No, because they are going down to food banks, or they cannot get on the housing list and they are really ...

Deputy Tadier

It would be nice if the Chief Minister, in particular, could use his great enthusiasm for this urgent democratic change that needs to happen to finally support this proposition rather than finding ways to stall it.

Democracy on Jersey the " Jersey Way " The Queen should be ashamed that in this age, Jersey has to undergo this farce of democracy, by one of her appointed chosen ones.

Part of an article - Quote:

The Jersey Evening Post has highlighted a perennial problem with the role of the Bailiff. Despite protestations that the Bailiff has no vote and no power other than that of Speaker, in fact he has the power to veto questions and propositions from members.

Propositions should, as Deputy Higgins himself mentioned, meet three tests -to be lawful, to corresponds with Standing Orders and not to be detrimental to States business. What emerged was that the Standing Orders make it plain that a Member has no right to lodge a proposition or indeed ask a question without the leave of the Bailiff.

How do you send out signals of desperation to save your Â£330,000 a year wage packet, your title of first Citizen and that large expense account ?You write a letter to the Chief Minister agreeing with your brother and ex Bailiff Phil. Bailhache ( whom did not want a child abuse enquiry and spoke against ) that the care enquiry are wrong and so is Napier et al. The rolls of chief judge and speaker in the house are politically neutral and should remain.

To every thinking politician, I would suggest Bailhache the bailiff, has just lost the debate ( that he should not be taking part in ) and for those in the assembly it is clear that the rolls should be split.

Bailiwick Express.

But, in a letter to Senator Ian Gorst and the Council of Ministers, excerpts of which are included in a proposition which is expected to be lodged by the Privileges and Procedures Committee later today, the Bailiff explains why he believes it would be a bad idea to split his job in two.

He describes the inquiryâ€™s recommendation 7 as â€˜illogical and unnecessaryâ€™. And concludes by writing: â€œI should be grateful for your assurance that you will not take the line that the Care Enquiryâ€™s Recommendation 7 is a reason for supporting the proposition of Deputy Tadier, or indeed for re-visiting the issue of the Bailiffâ€™s role generally.â€

One of the committeeâ€™s members, Deputy Sam Mezec, says the Bailiffâ€™s intervention is totally unwarranted and goes to underline why the role should be split. He claims it shows that despite the Bailiff claiming to be apolitical, he is playing an active role in politics.

Do not forget that this is the bailhache brothers who for years including being AG, Deputy Bailiff and Bailiff. They are the power behind the establishment party!It is obvious that all the ministers and assit ministers belong to the establishment party that rules Jersey.Ever since the 1946 elections when the establishment member stood for election under the name ( just cannot remember the name right now ) once they were i9n the states they disbanded and secretly became the establishment party which they have always denied!The time really has come to get rid of this party and have people who will govern for the whole island and not just the rich.I am fed up with paying more and more taxes and the rich pay next to nothing on their earnings and interests from the bank and business.Zero 10 must go!! The banks will not leave! Jersey is to good a place to keep their money and head offices in to pay no tax. They were willing to pay the tax but the states got the wind up that they might leave. Will let them go and our island will not be so over crowded.No need such a large civil servants and fewer cars on the road etc.Roll on MAY 2018!

For foreign readers who may have money stashed in a stable well run offshore account in Jersey, this may interest you from another incredibly well run and respected local Jersey blog who have received accolades from the English major news media and established reporters.

VFC

Anonymous21 August 2017 at 19:24

Well this gets weirder by the day, Now we have the current Bailiff William Bailache sending a letter to CM Ian Gorst (So NO political influence there then according to former Bailiff Philip Bailache, he who turns off elected members microphones)

What those out side of this Island might like to know is that the Bailiff has the power to 'decide' what questions an ELECTED member of the States can ask!!! so once again we can clearly see that the Bailiff has NO political power....why are you all laughing? Stop it right now or I will have a Supper Injunction slapped on you courtesy of Data Protection. Seriously this Monty Python nonsense has got to stop before this Island goes belly up.

Well, i am so outraged that i have sent an email to every states member.message. The bailiff is political and his brother before him!They will not allow a question if it is bad for the coM's. Turing off microphone Christmas message.!THe two brothers are the establishment's power house and it shows all the time.The bailiff has to go from the chamber!Even our ex-bailiff coming to try and defend a.lewis now that tells you something, Must not let the can of worms out by keeping the truth about the Police Chief and his sacking (that was a sacking ). Making sure lewis do not say anything that he should ( the truth and pressure along with lies )

The position of Bailiff was created shortly after the Treaty of Paris 1259. However more recent reports have advised on the updating - to a modern democratic system. Chief Minister Gorst and other ministers have agreed ( but taken no real positive action ) and recently Francis Oldham (although to be fair not part of her terms of reference ) has observed and commented that the duel roles of the Bailiff as head Judge and speaker of the States should be split.

It will probably be no surprise to outside observers, that Philip Bailhache ( ex bailiff and speaker himself ) is happy to see his brother in the position of speaker and head judge and get a huge annual remuneration of Â£330,000 and two thirds of that as a pension. There are many well worn conversations about bringing in at extra cost judges to cover for the speaker while he is in the assembly and not working as a judge. The new position created a speech writer for the bailiff salary Â£95,000 did not go down well. No doubt if you are interested you will have other examples that do not sit well or of which you approve.

Should a sitting politician elected to secure better quality of life for islanders really use his position as a Senator in Government to support his brother who is speaker of the same Government ? Is this not nepotism and personal conflicted interest ? Does this action not reflect badly on the rules of abstaining when one has self interest.

Ex Deputy Alistar Layzell abstained when a super market at Le Quennevais wanted to purchase a bungalow to extend its carpark. If my memory serves me well Layzell was on planning. He left the room as his mother or grandmother owned the property. He was conflicted.

Clearly if a member of your family is involved in a states debate the right thing to do is to abstain, but it appears Sir Philip takes the view that this obvious conflict of interest does not apply to himself.

What other conflicts does the Senator and Minister in the States of Jersey Government feel apply to others and not himself or his family ? He is also on record as saying that he will take the Â£45,000 a year plus expenses in States remuneration after being elected because " I am worth it ".

Judging by present values displayed by Senator Bailhache let the observer see which politicians take his view in the States assembly. Will the voters in the election a few months from now also feel that " Sir " has been honourable in supporting his brother and the duel rolls of Bailiff as speaker and head Judge of the judiciary.